Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 29126 (AP)

G.Lakshmanna v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/19227/2018 · 2025-03-28

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010416152018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 19227/2018 Between: 1. G.LAKSHMANNA, S/O.JAMMANNA, 33YEARS, R/O. UYYALAWADA VILLAGE (VIA) B-CAMP POST OFFICE, ORVAKAL MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATRAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DIST.. 2. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, DISTRICT WATER MANAGEMENT AGENCY, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 3. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, PROJECT OFFICER, MNREGS. ORVAKAL MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. J U M V PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SPL C FOR NREGS(M S R CHANDRA MURTHY) The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... a writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not permitting the petitioner to join the duty in pursuance to the orders of reinstatement passed by the 2nd respondent dated 20.03.2018 in Proc.No. 204/Sr.Mate deltion/HRM/2016 as being illegal, arbitrary and is in violation of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to forthwith reinstate the petitioner in service by implementing the orders of reinstatement dated 20.03.2018 of the 2nd respondent.” 2 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel for Respondents would submit that they have implemented the interim orders passed by this Court and the Petitioner has continued in the employment and subsequently because of the misconduct of the Petitioner, he was terminated. The written instructions received in this regard are placed on record. For ready reference the written instructions are extracted hereunder: “Further, it is submitted that Sri G.Lakshmanna, Ex-Field Assistant/Sr.Mate, Uyyalawada GP, Orvakal Mandal has submitted his joining report on 25.06.2018 and the MPDO/PO, Orvakal (M) has admitted the individual to the duties to that effect the MPDO/PO has submitted the report on 25.06.2018, hence the MPDO/PO has complied the orders issued by the Hon'ble High Court of A.P., duly admitting the individual to the duties. Further it is submitted that while the things stood thus certain allegations were raised once again against Sri G.Lakshmanna, Ex-Field Assistant/Sr.Mate, Uyyalawada GP, Orvakal Mandal during the conduct of 11th round Social Audit and accordingly the individual was again terminated from service vide Procgs.No. 134/DVC/SA/2018, dt: 21.12.2018 due to misappropriation of Govt. funds in 11th Round Social Audit. Further, the individual has appealed before the District Collector/DPC, MGNREGS, Kurnool District. The Appellate Authority has conducted the personal hearing and rejected his appeal duly confirming the orders of termination issued by the Project Director, DWMA, Kurnool.” 3. Sri J.U.M.V.Prasad, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the petition may be disposed of by giving liberty to the Petitioner to challenge the termination order. 4. In that view, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the Petitioner is at liberty to challenge the termination order, if so aggrieved. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:28.03.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.19227 of 2018 Dt.28.03.2025 Dinesh